Thousands of military jobs have opened up to women in recent years, but not those in the front-line combat units. That may soon change, however, as a result of a lawsuit brought late last year by four women veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Their complaint alleges that banning women from combat roles solely on the basis of their gender violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution and restricts women’s opportunities for career advancement and higher earnings and pensions.

It’s time to end this discriminatory policy, which not only is unfair to military women who want to serve their country but also fails to acknowledge the changing reality of warfare.

Today, women make up 15 percent of America’s 1.4 million active-duty service members, and some 200,000 have served in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. More than 130 women have died in those conflicts, while an additional 800 were wounded. In counter-insurgency campaigns, where the distinction between front lines and rear areas are all but meaningless, women have frequently found themselves in situations involving direct contact with the enemy, even though they were formally assigned to combat support roles.

The world’s militaries have justified the exclusion of women from combat on a variety of grounds, including claims that women lack the necessary strength and stamina for such assignments and that their presence in male units would damage the vital esprit de corps commanders depend on to maintain unit cohesion.

Many of these arguments echo ones previously used to justify the exclusion of African-Americans and gays from combat.

Even if the military were completely integrated by gender, many women still probably wouldn’t rush to join combat units. Others might not be able to meet the physical requirements for those posts. But that’s no reason to exclude those who can.

Ultimately, a policy based solely on ability would create a stronger military that is more reflective of the country’s diversity and one in which fitness to serve is based on merit, not gender.